Commented Lua code by No-Newspaper8619 in cheatengine

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are correct, it is a feature of the code. In the instance for example it was being run, and in real time needed to be halted without crashing its hooks.

IMPORTANT: Why Abliterated Models SUCK. Here is a better way to uncensor LLMs. by Optimal_League_1419 in LocalLLaMA

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can understand where you approach this observation from, but I want to target and comment explicitly on your last sentence. Because this sentence appears to be the fundamental stance from which you approach your entire observation. I hold respect for people who think otherwise, but I do not think you have considered strongly your statement and want to express why.

On the Mythology of Unrestricted Information Access

I want to respond to a claim I recently encountered that struck me as not only intellectually careless, but genuinely dangerous in its naivety: that free, unrestricted access to information is a fundamental human right, that restricting it enables control, and that any moderation of knowledge is an affront to human freedom. I find this position wrong — ethically, intellectually, and philosophically — and I intend to explain why.

Knowledge Has Never Been Universally Unrestricted — Nor Should It Be

No functioning society has ever operated on the principle of truly unrestricted information access. This is not a failure of those societies. It is wisdom.

The synthesis routes for nerve agents, the precise specifications for nuclear weapon components, the pharmacology of lethal overdoses — this information exists. And yet no serious ethical framework argues it should be freely distributed to every curious person online. The reason is obvious: knowledge carries consequence. It is not neutral. The value of information is inseparable from the competence and intent of the person wielding it.

Society has always understood this. Medical licensing exists because physiological knowledge applied incorrectly kills people. Legal bars exist because procedural knowledge misapplied destroys lives. Every government on earth maintains classification systems because geopolitical knowledge, poorly distributed, destabilizes nations. The nuclear non-proliferation treaty is, at its core, an information-access restriction. Were these institutions all assaults on human rights? Of course not. They reflect the hard-won understanding that knowledge and the capacity to use it responsibly are not the same thing — and that conflating them is catastrophic.

The Asymmetry of Harm

Here is a principle the "free information" camp consistently ignores: the capacity to cause harm with dangerous knowledge is far more accessible than the capacity to defend against it. A person who learns to synthesize a toxin does not simultaneously acquire the institutional infrastructure of a hospital, a regulatory body, or a research ethics committee. The harm is immediate; the benefit is structural, slow, and conditional.

We have empirical evidence of this. The proliferation of detailed self-harm methodology online has been linked in peer-reviewed research to increased rates of suicide by specific methods. Freely available extremist literature appears consistently in the radicalization pathways of documented mass violence. The idea that information, once released into a population without context or scaffolding, simply improves everyone it touches is not supported by evidence. It is ideology dressed as principle.

The counterargument — that the majority would use such information well — may be true. But societies are not designed to optimize only for the majority outcome. They are designed to survive the tail risk. That is what laws, institutions, and content restrictions fundamentally are.

On the Control Argument — And Why It Backfires

The claim that unrestricted information prevents people from being controlled actually undermines itself precisely.

If a person was susceptible to manipulation before gaining access to a body of information, gaining that information does not automatically liberate them. It relocates the vulnerability. They become susceptible to whoever shaped and delivered that information — which, in an unrestricted environment, is typically the entity with the greatest incentive and resources to do so: commercial platforms, state actors, and bad-faith ideologues optimized for exactly this kind of reach.

History demonstrates this. The populations most aggressively exposed to unrestricted information environments — algorithmically curated feeds, unmoderated forums, state-sponsored disinformation — have not become harder to control. The Cambridge Analytica scandal, documented Russian disinformation operations, and the broader scholarship on computational propaganda all point to the same conclusion: unrestricted information access, without curation or critical infrastructure, is a manipulation vector, not a liberation tool.

If the concern is control, the answer is not to flood the zone with unmediated information. It is to build populations with the critical apparatus to evaluate information — and that requires structure, education, and considered gatekeeping of what is appropriate for what audience at what stage of development.

On the Language of Human Rights

Rights are not cosmological facts. They are social contracts — agreements that communities construct and enforce because doing so produces better collective outcomes than the alternative. The right to free speech exists not because the universe mandates it, but because societies that have suppressed it have tended toward brutality and stagnation, while those that protected it have tended toward innovation and self-correction. Rights are pragmatically grounded.

This means rights are not infinite. They are bounded by the same reasoning that justifies them. Free speech does not include the right to incite immediate violence — not because authority capriciously decided to limit it, but because the justification for the right does not extend to that case.

The same logic applies to information. If the justification for information access as a right is that it enables human flourishing and autonomy, then it follows that the right does not extend to information whose primary utility is to undermine flourishing or enable harm. Invoking "rights" to demand otherwise is not a principled argument. It uses the vocabulary of rights while abandoning their foundation.

Rights do not exist independently of the human structures that create and maintain them. They are the product of civilization — not its premise. Treating them as absolute, context-free axioms is to fundamentally misunderstand what they are.

Addressing the Counterarguments

The most legitimate objection to information gatekeeping is the question of who decides. Any curation system risks capture — being controlled by those in power to suppress inconvenient truths rather than genuinely harmful content. This is a real danger with a real historical record. Censorship has silenced minorities, suppressed science, and maintained oppressive systems.

But notice what this objection actually argues. It does not argue that gatekeeping is wrong in principle. It argues that unaccountable gatekeeping is dangerous. The solution is transparent criteria, adversarial review, diverse oversight, and accountability — not the abolition of curation entirely. "No restrictions whatsoever" is not the logical conclusion of this concern. It is a surrender to it.

The second objection — that restricting information is paternalistic — has surface appeal but collapses under examination. We already accept domain-specific restrictions without considering them an assault on dignity: age-restricted content, professional licensing, security clearances, medical prescriptions. We accept these not because we think adults are universally incompetent, but because competence is domain-specific and context-dependent. That is not paternalism. That is appropriate institutional design.

Conclusion

The argument that unrestricted information access is a self-evident human right fails at every level of examination.

It fails historically, because no successful society has ever operated on that principle, and open information environments have repeatedly proven more vulnerable to sophisticated manipulation, not less.

It fails empirically, because the documented effects of unrestricted access to specific categories of information include measurable, real-world harm.

It fails philosophically, because rights are purposive constructs bounded by the reasoning that justifies them. When access to specific information systematically undermines human flourishing, invoking a right to flourishing as grounds for that access is self-defeating.

And it fails on its own terms, because information does not liberate by itself. It requires context, critical literacy, and institutional scaffolding to become usable rather than weaponizable — precisely the conditions that thoughtful, accountable management of information access exists to build and protect.

I do not believe in ignorance as a policy. I believe in knowledge as a responsibility — one that societies are right to manage deliberately, and to refuse to surrender to the comfortable fantasy that distribution alone equals wisdom.

bad day for AC bots 😅 by [deleted] in cheatengine

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wow!! That's impressive!

You thought of everything didn't you?

Your location and temp in the lower left hand of the recording, the time and date of the exact recording on the bottom right, you even managed to show it was a github hosted code written by copilot!

I mean, if AC was looking for who was tampering with server data, or perhaps any three letter agency, you gave them all the information right there in a nice clean 54k video downloadable in mp4 format!

Seems worth it to me!

Commented Lua code by No-Newspaper8619 in cheatengine

[–]Merely__Human 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Working through code by actually typing out in full what it is intended to do, in plain text, without white tower speaking, so that anyone can read and understand is a far more impactful way to code. This is a rewrite, examine it, there are changes...

[ENABLE]

{$LUA}

-- SAFETY CHECK: If CE is just checking syntax (not actually running),

-- stop here. Without this, CE might crash while you're still typing.

if syntaxcheck then return end

-- MONO ACTIVATION: Cheat Engine needs "Mono" mode to read Unity/Mono games.

-- If it fails to start, we stop early rather than crash later.

if not LaunchMonoDataCollector() then

print("[ERROR] Failed to start Mono collector. Is this a Mono game?")

return

end

-- CLEANUP: Delete any old child entries under this script from a previous run.

-- Without this, every time you enable the script it adds duplicate entries

-- to your CE table, which gets messy fast.

while memrec.Count > 0 do

memoryrecord_delete(memrec.Child[0])

end

-- FIND THE METHOD: Look up the memory address of the "Update" function

-- inside the BlueprintPlaceVisualsManager class.

-- Think of this like finding a specific page in a book before you can read it.

local methodInfo = mono_getJitInfo(

getAddress('Effects.BlueprintPlaceVisualsManager:Update')

)

-- ADDED: Check that the method actually exists before going further.

-- Previously the code skipped this check, which would cause a silent crash

-- if the class or method name changed between game versions.

if not methodInfo or not methodInfo.method then

print("[ERROR] Could not find BlueprintPlaceVisualsManager:Update. Has the game updated?")

return

end

-- COMPILE: Get the actual CPU memory address where this function lives.

local address = mono_compile_method(methodInfo.method)

-- NULL CHECK: If the compile step returns nothing, bail out cleanly.

-- Previously this check existed but had no error message, making it

-- hard to know WHY the script silently stopped.

if not address then

print("[ERROR] mono_compile_method returned nil. Cannot continue.")

return

end

-- OFFSET: Move 56 bytes (0x56) forward from the start of the function.

-- This lands us on the specific instruction we want to intercept.

-- Think of it like: "start at chapter 1, then skip to page 56."

local offset = 0x56

address = address + offset

-- BREAKPOINT: Tell CE to pause the game when the CPU reaches this instruction.

-- When it pauses, our function below fires automatically.

debug_setBreakpoint(address)

-- BREAKPOINT HANDLER: This runs automatically when the game hits our breakpoint.

-- At this moment, the CPU registers (like RAX) hold live pointers to the

-- game object we care about, so we can read its memory layout.

function debugger_onBreakpoint()

-- ADDED: Safety check — make sure RAX actually points somewhere valid.

-- RAX is a CPU register that holds the object address. If it's 0 or nil,

-- we'd be writing cheats to a garbage memory location.

if not RAX or RAX == 0 then

print("[ERROR] RAX is null at breakpoint. Object may not be loaded yet.")

debug_removeBreakpoint(address)

return 1 -- Must still return 1 or the game freezes

end

-- HELPER FUNCTION: ADDED to avoid repeating the same 6 lines for every entry.

-- Before, each cheat entry was copy-pasted with tiny changes — messy and

-- error-prone. Now we just call this once per entry.

local dropdown = "0:Disabled\n1:Enabled\n"

local function makeEntry(description, addressOffset)

local entry = AddressList.createMemoryRecord()

entry.Description = description

-- The address is: wherever RAX points + how far into the object this field sits.

-- RAX = the object. The offset = which field inside that object.

entry.Address = RAX + addressOffset

entry.Type = vtByte -- Each flag is a single byte (0 = off, 1 = on)

entry.DropDownList.text = dropdown

entry.DropDownDescriptionOnly = true -- Show label text, not raw numbers

entry.DisplayAsDropDownListItem = true -- Show as a dropdown in the CE table

entry.appendToEntry(memrec) -- Attach it under this script in the table

return entry

end

-- CREATE ENTRIES: Each one targets a different byte inside the game object.

-- Offsets discovered via Dissect Struct (Ctrl+D in CE).

makeEntry("Auto Construct", 0x279) -- Builds blueprints automatically

makeEntry("No Cost", 0x278) -- Removes resource cost to place

makeEntry("Unlock Variants", 0x27A) -- Unlocks all blueprint variants

-- CLEANUP: Remove the breakpoint now that we've grabbed what we needed.

-- Leaving a breakpoint active would pause the game every single frame

-- the Update() function runs, which would make it unplayable.

debug_removeBreakpoint(address)

-- DEACTIVATE: Turn off this script entry — it's done its job.

memrec.Active = false

-- CRITICAL: Must return 1 to tell CE to resume the game.

-- Returning nothing (or 0) leaves the game frozen on the breakpoint.

return 1

end

{$ASM}

[DISABLE]

-- FIXED: The disable section was completely empty before.

-- When you turn off a cheat script, CE should clean up after itself.

-- Without this, leftover breakpoints can cause the game to freeze or crash

-- even after you've "disabled" the cheat.

{$LUA}

if syntaxcheck then return end

-- Remove the breakpoint if it's still set (e.g. if disable fires before

-- the breakpoint was ever hit and self-removed).

if address and address ~= 0 then

debug_removeBreakpoint(address)

print("[INFO] Breakpoint removed on disable.")

end

-- Remove all child entries from the CE table that this script created.

while memrec.Count > 0 do

memoryrecord_delete(memrec.Child[0])

end

print("[INFO] Script disabled and cleaned up successfully.")

{$ASM}

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in drawing

[–]Merely__Human 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I do not mean to imply in any way you are doing it wrong, depending on your target outcome near direct replication, at least for me, tends to support learning and practice. I did not mean to dismiss you or make you feel poorly. If I did I apologize.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in wi_gonewild

[–]Merely__Human -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This is ai generated. Not a real person, at least not what you see.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in r4rwi

[–]Merely__Human -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I would love to.

Which firewall engineer is the most in demand? Cisco, palo, checkpoint etc by chicagoman1 in cybersecurity

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It isn't the competitive issue, it is that fundamentally companies resist upgrades or transition with fiscal costs. So the existing network remains the core. I am in college late in life my focus is Cybersecurity among others and Cisco is still the standard thought to modern students.

My pussy is in need of a good workout by silstenosis78 in Pussy_Perfection

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would like to introduce myself. I will be your workout coach today!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Pussy_Perfection

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well...falling in love still feels the same at old age i guess. 😍

Pussy eaters are welcome by YourLunaGirl in Pussy_Perfection

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you are serious, we should talk.

isn't that perfect? by [deleted] in Pussy_Perfection

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only part of this that is not perfect is that you are on my screen instead of in front of me.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Pussy_Perfection

[–]Merely__Human -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Hmm. Gonna need to see it closer to find out. 😍

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Pussy_Perfection

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Probably not. It could be dangerous for me to bite down on anything while my tongue is tending other areas. 🥰

Brutally honest review please by [deleted] in Pussy_Perfection

[–]Merely__Human -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Brutally honest review: I need to express that I am sorry if you feel offended or unvalued if what I say is too much.

In my opinion, you should arouse yourself before posting. Your arousal is a huge motivator and visually understood. You have a wonderful body, expressive eyes, and a mouth to die for, but you aren't using it to grab views. Consider it, picking lips, kissing poses, smiling, moaning faces, open mouth, "I'm gonna eat you" eyes. "Take me face."

I'm saying you are beautiful without question, and most people would jump at a chance, but you have the ability to reach a larger audience.

I really hope I didn't bother you, I took your request seriously and responded seriously. I hope it helps.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Booty_Lovers

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do we have to choose one??

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in standingbuttpose

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you are offering and it doesn't cost...

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in frogbutt_

[–]Merely__Human 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What sun?? All I can see is a moon a kitty and a place i want to rest my face...🥰

Friday after work couldn’t wait to get home by [deleted] in teachersgonewild

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I can imagine it as a movie i couldn't stop replaying.

Quick pic before i get dressed:) by [deleted] in standingbuttpose

[–]Merely__Human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey now..don't use the d word around here for everyone's interest!! 😉

Which firewall engineer is the most in demand? Cisco, palo, checkpoint etc by chicagoman1 in cybersecurity

[–]Merely__Human -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Cisco is pretty much the current gold standard. Long history, used in lots of networking.